D O C O M O M
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
d o c o m o m o _ International working party for _ documentation and conservation Minimum Documentation Fiche 2003 of buildings, sites and neighbourhoods of the modern movement composed by national/regional working party of: Germany 0.1 College of the Federation of German Trade Unions, in Bernau near Berlin 1928-30 by Hannes Meyer / Hans Wittwer depicted item: ADGB School, students houses source: Winfried Brenne architects date: 2007 db code 1. Identity of building/group of buildings/urban scheme/landscape/garden Current name of building: Bildungs- und Innovationszentrum Waldfrieden (BIZWA), 3 1.1 Internat der Handwerkskammer Berlin Variant or former name: Bundesschule des Allgemeinen Deutschen Gewerkschaftsbundes 4 1.2 (ADGB) Bernau / College of the Federation of German Trade Unions 1.3 Number & name of street: Hannes-Meyer-Campus 1 5 1.4 Town: Bernau near Berlin 6 1.5 Province/state: Brandenburg 7 1.6 Zip code: D-16321 8 1.7 Country: Germany 9 1.8 National grid reference: 10 1.9 Classification/typology: EDC, college (further training for unionists) 11 d o c o _ m o m o _ International working party for ISC/R members update 2003 documentation and conservation of buildings, sites and neighbourhoods of the for office use only modern movement 1.10 Protection status & date: listed monument since 1977. An extension to the College built 1950- 12 1954 is also part of the monument. 2 History of building 2.1 Original brief/purpose: college and residential school: further training for unionists 13 2.2 Dates: commission/completion: The Trade Union school of the ADGB in Bernau near Berlin was 14 a work of the German Labour movement of the Weimar Republic, financed by the contribution of 4½ million union members. The objective of the institution was to enable volunteers from the trade union movement to enjoy further education in subjects such as trade union studies, management, econonomics or labour law. During the one month schooling, the student would be given physical training in natural enviroment to induce him to raise his standard of living and culture. The design actually executed was the result of a keenly contested competition in 1928 in which six of the foremost german architects were invited to take part (including Erich Mendelsohn and Max Taut). The prize and the assignment to build the school went to Hannes Meyer and Hans Wittwer because they not only designed a striking set of buildings but also put forward a new form of socio-educational organization of the school. Construction period / date: March/April 1928: competition July 1928: laying of the foundation stone August 1928: start of construction May 1930: inauguration 2.3 Architectural and other designers: Responsible for the planning and the final design of the ADGB 15 school were the swiss architects Hannes Meyer (1889-1954), successor of Walter Gropius at the Bauhaus in Dessau and its director in the years 1928-1930, and Hans Wittwer (1894-1952), leader of the architecture department at the Bauhaus Dessau between 1927 and 1929. 2.4 Others associated with building: Arieh Sharon, Hermann Bunzel and Konrad Püschel, students at 16 the Bauhaus Dessau, made their first experiences in the architectural profession on the building site of the ADGB school. 2.5 Significant alterations with dates: The Trade Union college of ADGB did exist for only 3 years 17 until the trade unions were banned by the Nazis in 1933. During the Nazi period 1933-1945 the site became a school for high-ranking SS officers. Astonishingly the school complex was untroubled by rebuilding, except for a baffle paint. After the war the Soviet occupation authorities handed the college over to East German trade union federation (FDGB). The new owner extended the site, which was given the status of a Trade Union Academy. In the early 1950’s the planning by architect Georg Waterstradt with new buildings let the school of the 1920’s untouched. Waterstradt added a building of almost the same size which stood parallel to the existing one and was modelled after its architecture. In 1952 the politics changed in the GDR, following soviet directives, as well the official position about urban development and architecture. The official enacted architecture, better known as “Bauen in nationaler Tradition” defamed bauhaus architecture. In case of the ADGB-college a complete deformation of the entrance situation took place, eleminating the original architecture by Meyer and Wittwer. Later on followed further annex buildings, neglecting the cultural and architectonical relevance of the ADGB-college. 2.6 Current use: After closing the FDGB Trade Union Academy in 1990 the college complex was 18 vacant for many years. In 2001 the province Brandenburg, owner of the college complex, and the Handwerkskammer Berlin (chamber of crafts of Berlin) concluded a contract to use the former ADGB college as an institution of education and technology with residential school. The opening d o c o _ m o m o _ International working party for ISC/R members update 2003 documentation and conservation of buildings, sites and neighbourhoods of the for office use only modern movement will be in autumn of 2007. 2.7 Current condition: The ADGB college has been renovated completely between 2001 and 2007 by 19 Winfried Brenne architects, Berlin. 3 Description 3.1 General description: The ADGB-college was built 25 miles outside of Berlin in the State Forest of 20 Bernau amidst a delightful pine forest with a lake. The college was designed to accommodate 120 students. Meyer and Wittwer designed a set of buildings putting forward a new form of socio- educational organization, affected by Pestalozzi’s theorie of the small circle from which larger communities would emerge. For studying this, the houses of the students are the most significant examples. The 120 students were organized in 12 cells of 10 cells each. Two students roomed together and five of these groups of two formed a cell (community of the floor) whose members lived together separate from the others. They ate together in the dining room, studied together in the lecture room and formed a section for physical training. Finally all cells could be assembled together with the teaching staff in the big auditorium hall, the dining room or stadium. The buildings were intended to reproduce these socio-educational functions in terms of brick and mortar by the configuration the buildings. The school (with seminaries, classrooms, a reading room and a gymnasium), the separate houses for the students and the teaching staff, the main wing with common rooms (auditorium, refectory, kitchen).The blocks are layed out along a main line of the gently undulating land, connected by a glass corridor going from the main wing near the approaching road to the school building at the furthest point of the property. The landscape is utterly unspoiled, with the exception of a sports complex. The beautiful view from the common rooms and the living rooms is a document for the architects’ intentions to forge close links between buildings and landscape. Also the architectural conversion and the design of the buildings and rooms follow purely functional thoughts. All buildings (except the education building with the class rooms) have flat roofs, and have been carried out in yellow brick. Furthermore steel windows, prism glasses for windows, walls and ceilings and uncovered components of the construction (reinforced concrete) characterize the design of the facades and the rooms inside. 3.2 Construction: Reinforced concrete slabs and columns in conjunction with masonry linings of the 21 side and gable walls. Ceilings of the Kleine’s system with standard blocks and steel reinforcement Intermediate floors were insulated with layer of xylolith, sound-absorbing powdered peat and a covering of linoleum; Roof constructed like intermediate floors, then Torfisotherm slabs, 1:5 concrete and layer of Ruberoid roofing 3.3 Context: No specifications 22 4 Evaluation Technical: The use of modern construction systems and building materials was a central principle in Meyer’s philosophy of architecture. Meyer used the potentials of new constructions and materials (steel, concrete, glass), to full capacity, as well for the design of the buildings. Meyer’s view to comprehend architecture as an economical and technical process, to “organise living”, always was affected the search for reasonable, persuasive and economocally justifiable 4.1 answers relating to construction, technique and design of a building. In Meyer’s entry to the 23 competition the students houses should be erected with an ultra-modern skeleton frame structure with slight ceilings of the “Feifel” system. This modular technique, similar to a construction kit, was not accepted by the building owner ADGB. Meyer and Wittwer had to fall back on a construction system for walls and ceilings (reinforced concrete) in combination with conventional masonry linings; a construction, which in d o c o _ m o m o _ International working party for ISC/R members update 2003 documentation and conservation of buildings, sites and neighbourhoods of the for office use only modern movement 1930 was already proved and tested for years. Social: In the 1920’s the ADGB ascended to the biggest organisation for unionised employees with political virility in Germany. The self-image of the trade unions aimed for a strong workers’ representation in the young german democracy. The activities of the trade unions followed the image „industrial democracy” with educational work as an important factor in the strategy. Beside the increasing sociopolitical power, grew the economical potenz of the ADGB. This allowed to 4.2 24 intensify the educational work and to build up institutions working in the field of education. The educational duty proclaimed by the ADGB intended to build 2 colleges in Germany for the training of the members of trade unionists, one in the western part and the other one in the eastern part of Germany.